On reflection - an England positive and negative

Thought commentary of the game was poor to not pick out either of these at the time.

Haskell - thought he should have been man of the match. Work rate was superb, consistently first to the breakdown, and carried pretty well as well. Seeing him get away from a scrum and get to Earls at 13 at the same time as a miss pass was impressive.

Wigglesworth - his distribution was far too slow. There were times with the ball sitting at the back of the ruck and him looking cluelessly around for first receiver or a runner, that I thought I was back in 2008 (funnily enough the last time he played for England!). Compare that to Australia earlier in the day where the ball was released lightning fast by whoever was there, prop, 2nd row...
I remember sitting there with 55 mins on the clock, game effectively won, and thinking that would have been the perfect time to bring on Simpson, with Ireland's back row crocked...


On another note. Gutted for Wallace. Guessing this would have been his last world cup. Fantastic player, and never like to see a player injured like that.

In general the team had improved from the match in Cardiff. As i've said before, the trend is towards improvement (oh yes, there was somebody wanted to talk to me about that after this match - lets hope he's got the kahunas to reply).

The Tuilagi/Tindall partnership appeared to work well, but it was helped by Earls' revolving door defence (he did redeem himself with some super breaks later on though). Some poor kicking from Wilkinson at times, but as usual, we can forgive him that as his goal kicking was flawless as usual. Not sure what Flood added when he came on, to be fair, he only had a few minutes to impress.

There was nothing wrong with the speed at which the ball was recycled - at least initially. Ireland were pulled from one side to the other and it led to the Tuilagi try ultimately. Wigglesworth offers a different dimension to Care and Youngs, he's a more considered player. I too would have liked to have seen Simpson get some game time though.

bathmad - good spot on the Haskell comment, i was at the game and was really impressed by his athleticism. Its not always easy to pinpoint individuals when watching live but his charging across field from defensive scrums really stood out, the guy has serious wheels. He must be first choice number 8 now for me even if i'm still not convinced he has a brain.

I absolutely agree with great white.

bathmad you forget to mention that when Wigglesworth has been on the field the opposition hasn't scored tries against England.

Wigglesworth is an organiser, especially in defence. He gives more structure and control than Youngs and Simpson in my opinion.

I watched some of the highlights of the match and his service didn't seem slow to me.

Wilkinson isn't known for his dynamism either so it is fitting to pair him with Wigglesworth.

Flood should be paired with Youngs or Simpson.

Haskell has proved a lot wrong of late, I said he was your version of Andy Powell and some agreed with me but he has really started to put his hand up and doing the biz.

Again I have commented that England would not go anywhere with Tindall and Hape in the centre but Tuilagi looks to be adding something different, time will tell I suppose.

Have never been a Cueto fan but I am glad we won't have to face a back 3 of Ashton Foden and Armitage until later ( if at all) in the competition.

Agree with the Haskell comments, was really impressed with him. On watching the game back, he constantly put serious pressure on O'gara throughout the game, and as you said bathmad, was always first to the breakdown. Different style of play to Easter, but a breath of fresh air to say the least.
Just out of interest, where's this whole 'Haskell hasn't got the brain for an 8' come from? I agree that he's not the most refined of characters, but he's played there for Wasps and Stade on quite a few occasions, and done quite well from what I've seen! Think he has a genuine chance to overtake Easter in the pecking order, offers something bullish and athletic.

Another one is the fact that Lawes played most of the game in the backrow and didn't look out of place. The commentary didn't mention he was playing out of position until the 2nd half, probably because the sky commentary is absolutely awful. It'd be nice to have commentators that simply watch the game and tell you what's going on (like Bill McClaren!) rather than wax lyrical about their current favourite player even when they haven't got the ball or aren't even on the pitch. Rant over.

Haskell should carry on at 8 for me. Agree Lawes looked good at 6 and Croft seemed a lot more involved at 7 then in the other games. I don't know if that was just him raising his game or the positional swap though. It might have also helped him having two big tacklers and power players in the backrow alongside him.

Wigglesworth was very good, if he could just work on his pace and threaten a bit more he'd be a very complete scrum half. A good point be Beshocked though that our defence looked a lot more solid on Sat, i thought a lot of this was due to the centres working really hard and not letting much ball get out wide, both of them looked like men on a mission.

Haskell had a very good game but he is just as likley to be anonomous in the next game. He's more the new Tom Rees as opposed to Andy Powell as during the warm up matches he has gone missing for large periods.

Sorry, I still think the ball was sitting at the base of the ruck for far too long, and far too often.

As a neutral I don't remember Lawes having that great a game. His tackling or carrying didn't seem that strong for such a big bloke

Lawes has been a bit quite in these games tbh, i don't know if it was due to the neck injury he took or what. He's getting back there and putting in good hits but yea he isn't committing as much as he was in attack or defence.

Still solid though, he just needs to settle back in and get the aggression back.

munkian wrote:As a neutral I don't remember Lawes having that great a game. His tackling or carrying didn't seem that strong for such a big bloke

It wasn't one of his best games and I do think his carrying could improve but I actually thought he tackled well. Also considering he played at 6 for most of the game you didn't notice we had 3 locks on the field so I think he did a good job.

I believe Lawes has played at 6 a lot - probably more than at lock. The route to the top at 6 is, however, somewhat more congested than that at lock and he has done well at playing lock and bringing added athleticism around the field

Haskell needs to work on his control of the ball at the scrum. Easter and Crane are masters of this and if we want it to be a weapon it needs to improve. I suppose this will only happen with game time at 8.

lostinwales wrote:I believe Lawes has played at 6 a lot - probably more than at lock. The route to the top at 6 is, however, somewhat more congested than that at lock and he has done well at playing lock and bringing added athleticism around the field

I don't think so. He moved to 6 for the U20 because of Kitchener and Gaskell and he played there a bit for Saints but he started out as a lock and it only seemed to be a stop gap when he was in back row.

Haskell has looked quite impressive at 8. Really seems to have upped his game. He's also been around the england side for a long long time. He's only 26 and has around 35+ caps.

Manu's Boxing Coach wrote:

munkian wrote:As a neutral I don't remember Lawes having that great a game. His tackling or carrying didn't seem that strong for such a big bloke

It wasn't one of his best games and I do think his carrying could improve but I actually thought he tackled well. Also considering he played at 6 for most of the game you didn't notice we had 3 locks on the field so I think he did a good job.

This is what I meant, he played out of position and you weren't sat there thinking "where are our back row players?". I wouldn't expect him to play a superb game out of position but I am a little happier about the lots of props not many back row choice that MJ has made.

If I were an English fan my main worry would be losing manu, you seem to have little else in attack.

Beshocked makes a fair point. Wigglesworth's defensive game was top notch, and he made a serious contribution with his covering back. His box kicking is also pretty decent and with the other two scrum halves being quite similar, he offers a nice contrast. His passing is actually pretty good, where he can be slow is more his decision making. Sometimes he picks the ball up and then assesses his options, as he does at Sarries, where the better decision would be to zip it wide. In that sense he can slow things down, but there's nothing wrong with the speed and accuracy of his service.

Still, I would start either Youngs or Simpson as first choice were I MJ. England need a 9 that gives them an attacking edge from that position, otherwise there just isn't enough of a threat. The Armitage try was nicely worked, but whilst it was encouraging to see an outside break from Tuilagi, neither Argentina nor Scotland will play a light weight revolving door at 13. The likes of Bosch, Ansbro and Lamont are capable of stopping Tuilagi in his tracks, and won't be so easily swatted to one side. England need a 9 like Youngs who is able to break from the ruck situation and have that pace to clear the defensive line. Even if unsuccessful, it'll force the opposition forwards to guard with numbers the ruck area, and leave more space out wide.

With Wigglesworth at 9, the threat of a break is non-existant. Where he will be useful is in situations where England have their noses in front, and they need a smart thinking player to be clever at 9, and someone who will play a top quality sweeping role in defense.

munkian wrote:If I were an English fan my main worry would be losing manu, you seem to have little else in attack.

We have plenty of other attacking threat, they just won't get any space to use without a threat in the centre, so I agree my biggest worry is losing Manu. Let's not restart the centre debate though, I mean we had one game against weak Irish centres and they did OK so everything is 100% rosy right? .....Right?

Haskell had a good game overall but he needs to improve his scrummaging technique at No8. He binds far too high and offers very little to the initial scrum.

Ashton didn't look comfortable in defence, in fact decidedly shaky. Expect him to be targeted in RWC.

Thompson looks better now than what he was in 03.

Wigglesworth service is loopy and poor for a test No9 but defensively very sound.

Croft upped his game and has finally stopped hanging around on the wing all match.

Overall much to improve on for England but going in the right direction.

flankertye wrote:Haskell has looked quite impressive at 8. Really seems to have upped his game. He's also been around the england side for a long long time. He's only 26 and has around 35+ caps.

Agreed, a very strong game from Haskell. He should start at 8 in my view against Argentina, Easter should come on from the bench. Haskell is now combining his work rate (which has always been of the highest order) with brains. He now thinks a lot more when he's on the pitch, and picks and chooses when to hit rucks and when to stay out. He targets players who he thinks are either slow (and therefore disruptable) or dangerous (and therefore in need of shutting down). His number 8 pick-up has also improved hugely, and he can give England real momentum from there - something Easter can add only he does is more slowly. He can still fumble a bit at the base when under pressure, one area where Easter is better, but I think that's a small point when you consider how strong the England scrum is.

It's a shame for England that he won't be available for a while after the WC. He'd be a good choice as the next captain in my view.

I was pretty surprised that Simpson wasn't given any game time, he'll be heading to NZ with no test match experience. Will Johnson play him at all in the pool stages, or with Youngs not having played for so long, will he use him and` Wigglesworth for every game?

I don't remember seeing Earls make any breaks, let alone "super" ones.

Lawes has played at 6 a bit but he has always been primarily a lock.

Haskell did play really well but I wouldn't have him down as a captain.

Really happy with a wilkinson/tuilagi/tindall defensive line. Manu has no problems with his front on tackling but his positioning at 13 is suspect so sandwiching him between those two can be no bad thing. I'd hold off on saying it's our definitive best centre partnership until they come up against a top attacking side though (not a criticism of Ireland - BOD and SOB were huge losses for you), which may not be until the knockouts